Re: Concerned about Subversion's speed

Sander Striker's organizing some scalability test cases right now; I'm
betting this scenario is going to make it onto the list :-).

"Matt Blais" <mblais1@yummage.com> writes:
> Some rough measurements of svn's speed:
>
> On a lightly-loaded WinXP-Pro SP1 machine (P4 2.4GHz, 1GB RAM):
>
> In a directory containing 330 files under ra-local version control, plus
> about 700 other files, and no subdirs under version control:
>
> 'svn st' 24 seconds
> 'svn st -uv' 28 seconds
> 'svn up' < 1 second (no updates needed)
>
> This is heavily CPU-bound: my hard disk light barely flickered at all.

How do these numbers compare with similar operations in CVS (say, run
'cvs status' on the same tree in CVS)?

> So, can I count on these numbers being pared down by at least a factor
> of 10 in the near future (i.e., by release-1.0)? Or should I just give
> up on ever using subversion on projects that might require directories
> of this size?

We're trying to identify and fix scalability problems before 1.0. How
we prioritize them will depend partly on the total list, and partly on
how it compares with CVS.

Thanks for the report,
-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 12 06:15:16 2003